While I was doting about with my lovely lady in Central Park we made a detour to the South East corner so I could take in Manders work in a public space atmosphere. His works in the Tonya Bonakdar Gallery in Chelsea seemed larger, though they were in fact smaller in scale than this work ‘Head’ in central park. This is what happens when there is no ceiling or walls to confine sculpture, the ceiling in public work becomes infinite, and ‘walls’ are defined by surrounding architecture, which is immense in NYC, and organic life can also be very impeding to scale (trees). Our physical relationship becomes dwarfed if the sculpture is large enough to fully occupy the environment a public work demands and here, in this occupation of space, is where sculpture goes beyond what painting can only imply.
My recent endeavours on Vancouver Island with the installation of ‘Out From Out Where X’ in a public location gives me a frame of reference for outdoor spaces and the works they demand. I thought I was there this time; as I’ve installed two other sculptures in this location prior to this one. The first, ‘Core’, wasn’t quite there, the second, ‘Core II’ was getting there.
This time I thought I had it, but alas, just a little bigger and I’ll be there, for this particular space anyhow.
Getting back to Manders 'Head', there is a lot at play here. He works in a very traditional sense of sculpture; rendering in clay and casting in bronze, continuing the linage of classical statuary. However, the classical masters very much like to ‘show off’ the fact that their material is bronze, sculpture is important when it is made of bronze, right? Manders patinates his works in such a manner as to refer back to his initial material for creating his sculpture. The drying and cracked nature refers to organic decay, yet its form is fixed in metal. Notions of an abandoned relic are presented in this. His works in the gallery are more convincing of this material 'trickery', once you realize the material is bronze (I only found this out after some further research into his work), the whole dynamic of the sculpture shifts. My mind goes straight into a art making process breakdown, I rollercoaster through all the various steps the creation of this work in bronze would endure. Unfired clay or concrete would indeed be fairly straight forward, as the bronze patina connotes it is. Not only has this work more than quadrupled in labour, but it is now 90% more expensive than the counter part it was cast from and eludes to still being. Here is where Manders has my full attention, this dialogue begins a completely new narrative which is fully loaded. For example the wooden and steel supports suggest a working model abandoned mid process, before the artist had the opportunity to finish the work and cast it. Is this work finished, abandoned, a relic? I can completely relate to this playful materialist diversion and parody.
This brings to mind some of my current research into the analysis of the intrinsic cultural codes of my materials and the interchanging of processes from my street art practice to a studio environment.
In the outdoor location ‘Head’s’ yellow cedar additions are cleary cast cast in bronze, and in the gallery work they are what they are. Also, the pedestal or propping devices the sculpture suggests it is being supported by, but are clearly unnecessary, are also cast in bronze. In 'Heads' instance they are actual objects, two bronze chairs, a luggage chest, an oversized wooden doorstop, and some 'standard' dimensional wooden dunnage; all fitting into an object making paradigm in a 1:1 scale.
Here, this approach of object making and figurative work "creates a paradoxical sense of both immediacy and timelessness, of something newly made with fresh clay, yet belonging to the traditions of classical statuary" (Nicholas Baume, Director and Chief Curator-Public Art Fund). Although I enjoy this paradox, I believe it is more accurately articulated in his gallery exhibition. In this public work the bronzes patina connotes too clearly that this work is BRONZE statuary, and the objects in 1:1 scale scream 'object art props' rather than leave the viewer in a place of quandary regarding notions of is this a finished work of art or relic? as the gallery installation suggests with its 'make shift' steel propping devices, and convincing patina.
Don't get me wrong, 'Head' is a stunning pubic art installation, it has actually gotten me very curious regarding Manders direction, and I am grateful to have experienced the gallery exhibit before I visited this public intervention of his sculpture. They're are clearly different tactics at work here and he's got me inspired and inquisitive to further explore these dynamics at play. This to me answers that questions our professors are always asking us, "what does your art do?"
Comments